Telangana High Court
M.V.S.S.Seshagiri Rao vs Smt. M. Bharathi Devi 2 Others, Rep. By ... on 23 January, 2020
Author: Challa Kodanda Ram
Bench: Challa Kodanda Ram
THE HON' BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.452 of 2006
ORDER:
This criminal revision case is filed against the order dated 06.09.2002 passed by the Judge, Family Court, at Hyderabad, insofar it relates to M.C.No.1 of 2002 in O.P.No.914 of 2000.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record. No representation for respondent No.2.
The learned Judge, Family Court, at Hyderabad, while disposing of the matters in O.P.No.883 of 1996, M.C.No.1 of 2002 in O.P.No.914 of 2000, O.S.No.117 of 2001 and I.A.No.1053 of 1997 in O.P.No.883 of 1996 by way of a Common Order/Judgment dated 06.09.2002, observed with respect to M.C.No.1 of 2002 as under:
"4. M.C.1/2002 is allowed as prayed for granting maintenance at Rs.500/- P.M to RW1 (wife) during her life time or till PW1 complies to decree for restitution of conjugal rights to take her to his company and at Rs.500/- P.M to the daughter Gayathri or who is with RW1 so long as the child is in the custody of RW1 or till marriage of the daughter or till joining of the couple as per decree in O.P.914/2000 or in the case of disobedience of the decree in addition to compensation of Rs.1200/- P.M fixed payable with effect from today. There is no order as to costs in the M.C. While making payment PW1 is entitled to adjust whatever the interim maintenance he so far paid in the MC in the C.R.MP.643/98 order Dt.18.3.98 which he paid now and then uptill 5.7.2000 this doesn't prevent any of the parties to ask for cancellation of maintenance or enhancement of maintenance subject to future change of circumstance and costs of living."
As can be seen from the impugned order passed by the Court below, the interim maintenance of Rs.500/- per month was granted in favour of the wife, Rs.500/- in favour of the daughter who is in the custody of respondent No.2; and in the event of disobedience of the decree by the petitioner by not taking the respondents to his company, an additional amount of Rs.1200/- P.M. is to be paid.
The evidence on record discloses that the petitioner has sufficient earnings as he was working as script writer and also as a lecturer in Nalanda institute, apart from earning agricultural income from cultivation of paddy at Valluru. It may be noted that the petitioner is an M.Sc. Physics graduate and earlier he was working in a pharma company.
The trial Court's finding is virtually the evidence on behalf of respondents with respect to granting maintenance to support respondent No.2 and her child who was studying in Class-III in Gudivada English medium school, and the maintenance awarded is reasonable.
In the light of the finding of fact recorded by the Court below, no interference is called for with respect to M.C.No.1 of 2002.
Accordingly, the criminal revision case is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand dismissed.
___________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 23rd January, 2020 KSM THE HON' BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.452 of 2006 23rd January, 2020 KSM